Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    IPSEC pfsense<->cisco asa multiple phase2

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IPsec
    11 Posts 8 Posters 8.4k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • D
      DD
      last edited by

      Plase read https://blog.pfsense.org/?p=1546 chapter about IPsec.

      Problems with rekeying with multiple phase 2 entries on a single phase 1 in some cases with IKEv1 – while many circumstances with multiple P2s on a single P1 work fine, there is an outstanding rekeying problem in some circumstances. Especially where you have several P2s on a single P1, we advise caution on upgrading at this time. Where both endpoints support IKEv2, changing from IKEv1 to IKEv2 will prevent this from being an issue. We have an open bug on this which we expect to have addressed in a future 2.2.1 release.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • T
        tpetrov
        last edited by

        Thank you for your reply. Cisco ASA supports IKEv2. My tunnels are now IKE v2 but the situation is the same. The same responce from asa… I think the tunnels are more unstable.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • C
          cmb
          last edited by

          The rekeying issue noted in that circumstance isn't what you're seeing there. IKEv2 should be a fine choice in that case.

          You will have to delete the IKEv1 SA it previously negotiated under Status>IPsec. To make sure you're definitely getting a fully-clean start, stop the strongswan service, then start it. Or reboot if you want to make really, really sure.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • T
            tpetrov
            last edited by

            the problem is solved!!

            The IKEv2 is not the proper approach.

            I don`t know why but if I add a second p2 pair with the [+]button - "based on this one" the problem occured.
            If I add the rule manually all works fine. These p2-pair configurations looks absolutely identical but with the first one the communication is wrong and with the second one all works fine.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • E
              eri--
              last edited by

              Ah yes good catch that is a bug i am openeing a ticket about.

              There are some ids generated on the back that if you use the based on this one it will reuse the id and that will break the config generation.

              Thank you for the analysis.

              To follow-up https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/4349

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • F
                fyfebc
                last edited by

                Thank you tpetrov! I have spent half a days searching and attempting different options in order to bring up multiple P2's. I was about to build an old 2.0.3 version and replace my existing 2.2. What a headache. Thanks again.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • O
                  Olive
                  last edited by

                  I'm so happy to have found that thread  ;D . I faced that issue since days and days without understanding, thinking I was too stupid to understand my errors, I was about to jump by the window  :o

                  Thank you !!!

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • M
                    mav137
                    last edited by

                    Is this issues fixed? I'm having problems connecting a PfSense box to a Cisco ASA.
                    Subnets are configured as additional Phase2 entries (I added them manually. I did use the "based on this rule" before).
                    Would like some confirmation this functionality actually works.

                    Thanks

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • C
                      cmb
                      last edited by

                      @mav137:

                      Is this issues fixed?

                      Yes, long ago.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • B
                        behek
                        last edited by

                        Use check box in P1:  Enable this to split connection entries with multiple phase 2 configurations. Required for remote endpoints that support only a single traffic selector per child SA.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.